Will wrote:Before the Dalai Lama left Tibet he thought Buddhism was the "only true religion". But his attitude changed when he visited India in 1956. What happened in India?

My visit to the Theosophical Society in Chennai (then Madras) left a powerful impression. There I was directly exposed to people, and to a movement, that attempted to bring together the wisdom of the world's spiritual traditions, as well as science... After more than three months in what was a most amazing country ... I was a changed man. I could no longer live in the comfort of an exclusivist standpoint that takes Buddhism to be the only true religion.

From Toward a True Kinship of Faiths

Isolated Tibet with its isolated truths. What happened in India? Obviously the experience that "the isolated truths of isolated Tibet" is not "all".

Are you at odds with diversity and appreciation of living in an environment where there is access to diversity in the first place which enables one to compare?

kind regards

what?

I am saying that we do no have to restrict ourselves to the reductionist and exclusive approach to "truth" that dominated Tibet and the tibetans due to their former situation of being isolated from diversity.We are nowadays in a far better situation and should appreciate this and MAKE USE OF IT.

Are you at odds with diversity and appreciation of living in an environment where there is access to diversity in the first place which enables one to compare?

kind regards

what?

I am saying that we do no have to restrict ourselves to the reductionist and exclusive approach to "truth" that dominated Tibet and the tibetans due to their former situation of being isolated from diversity.We are nowadays in a far better situation and should appreciate this and MAKE USE OF IT.

Kind regards

so modern understanding is better than ancient "knowning" in your revisionist arrived at, cherrished ideas?

TMingyur wrote:I am saying that we do no have to restrict ourselves to the reductionist and exclusive approach to "truth" that dominated Tibet and the tibetans due to their former situation of being isolated from diversity.We are nowadays in a far better situation and should appreciate this and MAKE USE OF IT.

Kind regards

so modern understanding is better than ancient "knowning" in your revisionist arrived at, cherrished ideas?

What is "modern understanding"? Is it again one option of many? Why restrict oneself?

What is "ancient 'knowning'"? Is it again one option of many? Why restrict oneself?

Did I "cherrish" any specific ideas? I am not aware that I did. Oh ... I cherrished diversity and being open to it and make use of it, Yes I did that.

Theres a bonus in every ideology usually the encouragement of morale discipline, However I have not heard of many that involve training the mind, The Jains and the Hindus practise a varient of this strong concentration but for the purpose of union with god which brings them to the peak of samsaraic concentration.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

I am saying that we do no have to restrict ourselves to the reductionist and exclusive approach to "truth" that dominated Tibet and the tibetans due to their former situation of being isolated from diversity.We are nowadays in a far better situation and should appreciate this and MAKE USE OF IT.

I agree completely. Those engaged in Dharma/Dhamma practice are really very fortunate, but not only am I happy to know other religious traditions exist, I think they support each other (when people are not sniping) in innumerable direct and indirect ways. It's healthy for all concerned.

It's always best to be modest in one's claims. Nothing is lost when we are "right," and being open to criticism and other perspectives can be a true blessing when we are wrong-headed. Buddhism/Buddhists not excepted, of course.

Will wrote:I thought I was supporting your notion that just as Mahayana can be considered superior to Theravada, so also can religion X be thought better than religion Y, without falling into the "only true" versus "everybody else false" view.

I misunderstood you again my apologies

NAMO AMITABHANAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)Linjii―Listen! Those of you who devote yourselves to the Dharma must not be afraid of losing your bodies and your lives―

Will wrote:Before the Dalai Lama left Tibet he thought Buddhism was the "only true religion". But his attitude changed when he visited India in 1956. What happened in India?

My visit to the Theosophical Society in Chennai (then Madras) left a powerful impression. There I was directly exposed to people, and to a movement, that attempted to bring together the wisdom of the world's spiritual traditions, as well as science... After more than three months in what was a most amazing country ... I was a changed man. I could no longer live in the comfort of an exclusivist standpoint that takes Buddhism to be the only true religion.

From Toward a True Kinship of Faiths

Many Western Buddhists have scorn for the Theosophical Society, founded by Upasika Blavatsky. The Presence looked a little deeper.

In understanding is unconditioned love. Was so reflecting: If I am considering myself to be a buddhist and reject others approach to peace, what kind of narrow understanding I than have other than grasping to correct philosophical ideas, my opion?

"Harmony among the major faiths has become an essential ingredient of peaceful coexistence in our world. From this perspective, mutual understanding among these traditions is not merely the business of religious believers - it matters for the welfare of humanity as a whole".http://dalailamacenter.org/blog-post/ma ... dalai-lama

Will wrote:Before the Dalai Lama left Tibet he thought Buddhism was the "only true religion". But his attitude changed when he visited India in 1956. What happened in India?

My visit to the Theosophical Society in Chennai (then Madras) left a powerful impression. There I was directly exposed to people, and to a movement, that attempted to bring together the wisdom of the world's spiritual traditions, as well as science... After more than three months in what was a most amazing country ... I was a changed man. I could no longer live in the comfort of an exclusivist standpoint that takes Buddhism to be the only true religion.

From Toward a True Kinship of Faiths

Many Western Buddhists have scorn for the Theosophical Society, founded by Upasika Blavatsky. The Presence looked a little deeper.

In understanding is unconditioned love. Was so reflecting: If I am considering myself to be a buddhist and reject others approach to peace, what kind of narrow understanding I than have other than grasping to correct philosophical ideas, my opion?

"Harmony among the major faiths has become an essential ingredient of peaceful coexistence in our world. From this perspective, mutual understanding among these traditions is not merely the business of religious believers - it matters for the welfare of humanity as a whole".http://dalailamacenter.org/blog-post/ma ... dalai-lama

What HHDL means is that among religions there is no shared authority, no central committee deciding for everyone what is true and what is false. Recognizing the subjective nature of religious opinion, HHDL offers a more secular view. This is correct. To protect everyone's liberty, it is necessary to subordinate religious views to secular law i.e. insist on separation of church and state.

Since there can be no agreement among various religions around which is the "true" religion -- tolerance is required. This however does not mean that if you are a Buddhist you are required to think that Christianity makes truths claims that are as valid as Buddhist truth claims. All that needs to be recognized is that all religions make truth claims that cannot be verified by any mutually agreed upon standard.

So, I know for a fact that HHDL feels that Buddhism is the best religion. He also recognizes that this is just an opinion and insisting on this opinion to someone who does not share the same idea leads to strife and war. So rather than insisting that Buddhism is the best religion for everyone, he merely asserts it is the best religion for himself.

Then, when we cross that divide, we try to look at people from the point of view of their goodness. We try to meet people at that point.

Since we cannot make all religions the same, we need to recognize where it is that people are the same. Where they are the same is that they want happiness and freedom from suffering -- and religions evolve to provide those answers, differently for different people.

Will wrote:Before the Dalai Lama left Tibet he thought Buddhism was the "only true religion". But his attitude changed when he visited India in 1956. What happened in India?

My visit to the Theosophical Society in Chennai (then Madras) left a powerful impression. There I was directly exposed to people, and to a movement, that attempted to bring together the wisdom of the world's spiritual traditions, as well as science... After more than three months in what was a most amazing country ... I was a changed man. I could no longer live in the comfort of an exclusivist standpoint that takes Buddhism to be the only true religion.

From Toward a True Kinship of Faiths

Isolated Tibet with its isolated truths. What happened in India? Obviously the experience that "the isolated truths of isolated Tibet" is not "all".

Kind regards

Do not have the quote in front of me, but the Dalai Lama said that the sincerity and openness to all religions of the Theosophical Society members he met in India was what changed him.